Socialism with Chinese Characteristics which has been the Chinese model of development for the past 50ish years, has been enormously successful. Real wages in China have grown 4-5 times in the past couple decades whereas they've remained mostly stagnant (or declining) in much of the 'Developed World' for decades longer than that. This has translated into better quality of and increased access to necessities (such as food, housing, medicine) as well as other commodities and these benefits have been felt by the vast majority of the Chinese people.

Some of the 'left', and certainly many on the right, claim these gains are because of capitalism. But we on the left know better. In China, the State rules over the corporations. The government, lead by the CPC, owns and operates many SOE, which in turn lead the various industries (comprised mostly of private corporations). This isn't the sort of 'capitalism' present anywhere else, nor the sort that is imposed by the West on the 'Developing World'. That 'capitalism' is Neoliberal capitalism, which includes a massive reduction in the size, the role, and the power of governments, accompanied by an increase of the same of corporations. Because of the way the world economy is structured, this would mostly be an increased in the role and power of various Western corporations with some benefits felt by local corporations that are aligned with the former.

Various national governments have opposed such neoliberal reforms to varying results. The more socially inclined governments have had to face sanctions, coup, civil wars, to outright invasions until they either acquise or are destroyed. Those governments that acquiese or are more inclined towards the some of the local corporations have tried to allow access to foreign corporations with some control kept by the state over key sectors or for some power to be held by the local corporations over their industries. This is not what China has done. 'Capitalists' cannot claim the success of China as their own. Though, they, of course, do and blame 'communism' for repression in China and elsewhere.

This is also why 'Chinese imperialism' is different from the traditional 'Western imperialism'. When China makes deals with other nations, such as in Africa or Asia, it isn't the various corporations that lead the negotiations with the state acting as the bodyguard (in the form of the military). Rather, the Chinese government enters into those deals and decides, based on its assessment of China's needs, which industries and corporations will proceed forward.

What I've stated above is Socialism with Chinese Characteristics A successful model of governance and of organizing the economy, especially when contrasted to the past few decades in the various Neoliberal capitalist states.

What we have yet to see, however, is socialism. Socialism is not the success of an economic system but the relation of power in a society between classes. It is the mode of production, of organizing the workers. Democratic Socialism is as meaningless a term as 'Naan bread' or 'Chai tea'. Socialism is democracy, true democracy, unlike the democracy that has been the norm in the various so-called 'democratic' countries. The Chinese people are still exploited by the ruling class for their labour. The products of their labour are owned by either private capitalists or the various SOEs, that decide how to distribute the products (and the profits). And the Chinese people sell their ability to do labor in exchange for enough money to be able to afford to live. Today they get more money than they did two decades ago but the fundamental relation between the workers and the employers has not changed. In fact, inequality has massively increased.

The government, which controls the economy, is meant to represent this working class of China. And, as stated above, they have done a lot for the people of China, much more so than any government has. That is why they still enjoy a lot of popularity and why most Chinese are not out in the streets to revolt. But that doesn't prove they represent or act on behalf of the working class. This is proven by a metric other than economic success (and everything that economic success entails).

While their intentions are rooted in capitalism, the liberal elites are right when they say that people in their countries are free. People in the various capitalist countries have the freedom to vote for whomever they want, to criticize the government however they like, express whatever opinion they hold, work wherever they choose, and even protest anything they want whenever they wish to do so. Yes, all these rights are illusory and stripped away and suppressed whenever they threaten the businesses or the government in any real way. But they have resulted in real concessions too - mostly on social issues. The eight hour workdays and overtime pay was won by socialists, the feminist and civil rights movements are also rooted in socialism, in fact, they are rooted in militant socialism, the kind that carried guns and wasn't afraid to break things. But despite that, these policies are followed and celebrated much more in the capitalist West than any other. When people demand LGBTQ representation or an end to police brutality and systemic racism, or an end to the patriarchy, they do so by arguing that these are the fundamental values of Western (i.e. capitalist) society and when these rights are won, they are taken to be the victories of Western, liberal democracy (i.e. capitalism).

The kind of organizing and tactics that won the West the liberties it cherishes shouldn't be needed in China if the State represents and rules on behalf of the people. A true Communist party should crack down on racism and sexism and colorless and xenophobia and transphobia and homophobia and all the other evils that capitalist society promotes the first chance it gets. There is no reason the West should be able to claim moral superiority in these issues. And I am specifically talking about China because it is in a unique position never occupied by any other Socialist nation in history (except, for some time, by the USSR). Restricting freedom of press and elections and speech are understandable when there is a real threat from the capitalist powers that be of overthrowing the government. I understand these restrictions when we talk about countries like Cuba or Vietnam. But China can afford to give these rights (and so many more) to an extent the capitalist countries can't. A Communist party should do so the instant it is able to. The Chinese government, as a result of its successes, has put itself in a situation where these excuses we make for Cuba, Vietnam, even DPRK, do not work. It has been incredibly successful in rooting out the influences of the CIA and other organisations, in creating strong industries and media capable of resisting imperialist and capitalist propaganda. No other country can boast of that. It leads the capitalist world in multiple industries (5G being a big, recent example).

What, exactly, is China waiting for?

TLDR - Why isn't China more woke?